Soggy State Needs Gutsy Leaders

More rushing brown water, more muck and more heartbreak.

Add Lake Delhi and Monticello and several other Eastern Iowa towns to the flooded litany. By now, we know the drill.

Deluge, evacuate, watch in disbelief and then return to face the soggy, muddy slog toward recovery. Repeat.

Clearly, the emphasis now should be on immediate help for those who lost much in this past weekend's dramatic flooding. But you can't help but consider the bigger picture.

For one thing, the weather keeps turning on us. We can argue about the reasons, whether its global climate change or a pattern shift or a brief anomaly. What we do know, according to State Climatologist Harry Hillaker, is that the last three years are among the 12 wettest in 138 years of Iowa weather records. And 2010 is the third wettest ever through seven months. In the last 50 years, 35 have seen above-average precipitation.

We can make ourselves feel better by insisting that everything will be fine from now on. But something is happening. We can ignore it, or we can face reality.

For another thing, it's an election year, and I think we need some political leaders with the guts to do what it takes to lessen the risk we face from our raging rivers.

The track record is not great. The Legislature, even after the devastating 2008 floods, did little to nudge cities and farms to pursue watershed management and runoff practices that would reduce flooding. Interest groups managed to yank the teeth from proposals pushed by State Sen. Rob Hogg, D-Cedar Rapids, including development restrictions in the 500-year flood plain.

The governor's race also isn't encouraging. The favorite, former Republican governor Terry Branstad, has assailed Gov. Chet Culver's I-JOBS infrastructure bonding program, which included tens of millions of dollars for projects aimed at preventing future flood damage.

Branstad contends that I-JOBS is too expensive and created far fewer jobs than promised. But he doesn't explain how he would handle future flood prevention. Very little was done on long-term mitigation after the floods of 1993, which occurred on his watch. And during the current campaign, he's had little to say on the subject, except that he doesn't favor restrictions on development in the 500-year flood zone.

Culver is defending his record, but he's said little about his future prevention agenda.

Somebody has to stand up to developers, agricultural interests and others who think the status quo is fine. Otherwise, our children and grandchildren will someday be standing knee-deep in muck, wondering why we didn't do something.

Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@gazcomm.com